Houston Byrd, aka Kebra Nagast v. Van Dyken, North Park Seniors Manager Jane Doe; Housing Commission Manager Jane Doe

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California denied Houston Byrd's motion to proceed in forma pauperis under the Prison Litigation Reform Act's three-strikes provision, finding no applicable imminent-danger exception. The court dismissed the § 1983 and ADA action without prejudice for failure to pay the required filing fee, denied a motion to postpone as moot, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

Holdings

1. Plaintiff was barred from proceeding in forma pauperis because he had more than three prior prisoner civil actions dismissed on grounds qualifying as strikes under § 1915(g).
2. Plaintiff did not qualify for the imminent-danger exception because his complaint and supporting declarations did not plausibly allege imminent or ongoing physical danger at the time of filing.
3. The civil action was dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiff did not pay the full filing fee and was not entitled to proceed IFP.
4. The motion to postpone was denied as moot because the action was dismissed without prejudice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff was barred from proceeding in forma pauperis under the three-strikes provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
2. Whether Plaintiff plausibly alleged that he faced imminent danger of serious physical injury sufficient to invoke the exception to § 1915(g).
3. Whether the action had to be dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiff neither paid the filing fee nor qualified for IFP status.
4. Whether Plaintiff's motion to postpone the case should be denied as moot.

Disposition

dismissed